Legal Beagle: Gordon Campbell @GordonCampbell_ #GordonCampbell
26 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 Newer→ Last
-
Those wondering about the title of this article, probably haven't read the Twitter account that has been set up for Gordon, presumably by someone from Scoop.
-
I liked his reasoning which still stands even though (obviously) many of his facts were wrong. CK Stead's 'Smith's Dream' was written in the Muldoon era but the situation it describes seems much more likely today than it did then in my opinion.
-
Ian Dalziel, in reply to
'Smith's Dream'
Perhaps TV3 could put Sleeping Dogs on the telly for the masses
(I can't see the Gov't owned ones running it at the moment)
and it is such a groundbreaking film for NZ, serious story, great soundtrack, first feature for Roger Donaldson, and early movie for Michael Seresin, great vehicle for the young Sam Neill and Ian Mune, et al - so why not a groundbreaker for social change, now, as well
and if TV3 or the others won't show it at least NZ on Screen has the trailer
Go get popcorn for cop porn now... -
James Butler, in reply to
Those wondering about the title of this article
I call dibs on this gag.
-
Sleeping Dogs is on Youtube. I don't know if the copyright owners have given permission or not.
-
Graeme Edgeler, in reply to
I call dibs on this gag.
I did wonder if the name should appear four times :-)
-
Kumara Republic, in reply to
Perhaps TV3 could put Sleeping Dogs on the telly for the masses
Why stop at Sleeping Dogs?
-
Yoza,
"No reason is given as to why the Attorney-General is the Government’s “legal puppet”, and I would have thought that the fact Chris Finlayson is making so many reports suggests he probably isn’t a puppet..."
The premise that Chris Finlayson, National Party MP and a Cabinet minister for the current regime, is somehow not a compliant actor in implementing policy seems far more ridiculous than suggesting he is a puppet.
There are so few journalists in New Zealand that are prepared to critically analyse the dogmatic agenda of Labour /National public management systems that it is interesting to see who is prepared to go after those journalists that do.
I think this critique of Campbell's extensive article appears to be less of an analysis than an attempted character assassination. So much so that Farrar has gleefully linked to it on his blog -. http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2013/08/tidbits-2.html
There is a deep seated institutional abhorrence of dissenting voices throughout the New Zealand establishment, most noticeably from those who would lay claim to possessing liberal views.
I imagine someone as fearless as Gordon Campbell has many enemies festering amid the ranks of National, Labour, the public service and the corporate sector.
I doubt he will be losing any sleep worrying about a few minor points not meeting Edgeler's exacting standards.
-
4. Token Bill of Rights Act (BORA
) yeah No. 4 The last one.
overall thesis
Well Im not sure
No reason is given as to why the Attorney-General is the Government’s “legal puppet”, and I would have thought that the fact Chris Finlayson is making so many reports suggests he probably isn’t a puppet.
Or not!
Farrar has gleefully linked to it
Talking in tongues... I hope
-
I would love to see those who don't agree with Graeme's post provide some on-point rebuttal, instead of links to films and character assassination.
Anyone ???
-
Ian Dalziel, in reply to
instead of links to films
Que? I wasn't disagreeing with Graeme, merely a tangential aside triggered by another comment...
-
"chris", in reply to
I was stoked to finally get the chance to watch Sleeping Dogs.
-
Mark Graham, in reply to
Doesn't the Govt own Mediaworks these days? Apart from John Campbell, it certainly seems the case to me.
-
Mick Rose, in reply to
You're missing the point: I've got no reason to doubt Graeme's critique of the examples given by Gordon, and it's a useful critique, but it's also snide, pedantic and grandiose.
Why dedicate a blog-post to this when Graeme could have communicated privately with Gordon or posted a comment directly on Gordon's original article?
I agree with Yoza: Gordon's commentary and analysis is generally superb - this is a peculiar way to engage with that commentary.
-
philipmatthews, in reply to
Why dedicate a blog-post to this when Graeme could have communicated privately with Gordon or posted a comment directly on Gordon’s original article?
I agree with Mick. Why not just put these complaints in the comments at Scoop?
CK Stead’s ‘Smith’s Dream’ was written in the Muldoon era.
My turn to be pedantic, I suppose. Smith's Dream was first published in 1971 and Stead has talked about it as a response to Vietnam war protests, as he wondered how a more autocratic government would crack down.
-
Graeme Edgeler, in reply to
I agree with Mick. Why not just put these complaints in the comments at Scoop?
I would have if it was just one mistake. Stuff like that happens. It was the multiple errors on the same point that had me exercised in this case.
-
Rob Stowell, in reply to
I would love to see those who don’t agree with Graeme’s post provide some on-point rebuttal
-
Craig Ranapia, in reply to
You’re missing the point: I’ve got no reason to doubt Graeme’s critique of the examples given by Gordon, and it’s a useful critique, but it’s also snide, pedantic and grandiose.
Fucking hell, so it’s now “snide, pedantic and grandiose” to publicly critique a journalist being well… somewhat careless on basic matters of fact? Too right: Graeme pull your fucking head in, and stop acting like journalists and politicians actually have some kind of obligation to tell the truth, the whole truth and not just the bits they find convenient.
BTW, guys: Here's a modest proposal. Think about how incredibly dangerous it is to give "our side" a pass for playing fast and loose with the facts. If you're on the side of the angels, isn't it all the more important that you don't undermine your own credibility? This isn't the first time folks around PAS have been willing to cut Campbell slack they not only wouldn't give anyone else, but which nobody deserves.
-
Yoza, in reply to
I’m guessing you haven’t read Gordon Campbell’s defense of his article, to which Rob Stowell has already linked.
-
Craig Ranapia, in reply to
I’m guessing you haven’t read Gordon Campbell’s defense of his article, to which Rob Stowell has already linked.
You're guessing wrong. That's how the internet in the hands of grown ups work, and Gordon actually engaging with criticism (not entirely convincingly, IMO, but that's another kete of kai moana) is significantly more useful than coming onto Graeme's blog and telling him to STFU and be a good team player. When does that ever end well?
-
Lilith __, in reply to
telling him to STFU and be a good team player. When does that ever end well?
Sorry Craig, but where is anybody saying that? The only one trying to close down discussion seems to be you.
I’d like to see Graeme answer Gordon’s reply, particularly to give his response to Gordon’s main point about the erosion of democracy.
I’m all for fisking and debate. Although I find it odd that the title of this post is a person’s name, not the actual topic. It makes the post seem like a personal attack, even if it is not.
-
Graeme Edgeler, in reply to
I’d like to see Graeme answer Gordon’s reply, particularly to give his response to Gordon’s main point about the erosion of democracy.
I have answered Gordon’s reply as a comment to his piece.
Although I find it odd that the title of this post is a person’s name, not the actual topic. It makes the post seem like a personal attack, even if it is not.
As I note in my first reply, the title is a twitter joke directed at Scoop's Gordon Campbell twitter account, not at Gordon, who may not even know it exists :-)
-
"chris", in reply to
I particularly liked this Graeme:
Some of my favourite debates/discussions have been ones where I have ‘lost’. I don’t want my view to win, I want the better view to be my view, and that may mean recognising that the view I was arguing for was wrong. If someone changes my mind about something, I’m always a little more comforted that I (now) hold the right view. Having a view that someone hasn’t changed may just mean that I haven’t heard the right rebuttal yet.
-
Lilith __, in reply to
I’d like to see Graeme answer Gordon’s reply, particularly to give his response to Gordon’s main point about the erosion of democracy.
I have answered Gordon’s reply as a comment to his piece.
Oh right, cheers.
-
I haven’t heard the right rebuttal yet.
You can change your own views :-)
Post your response…
This topic is closed.